Are subjective memory problems related to

Are subjective memory problems related to suggestibility, compliance, false memories, and objective memory performance? SASKIA VAN BERGEN, MARKO JELICIC, and HARALD MERCKELBACH Maastricht University The relationship between subjective memory beliefs and suggestibility, compliance, false memories, and objective memory performance was studied in a community sample of young and middle-aged people (N = 142). We hypothesized that people with subjective memory problems would exhibit higher suggestibility and compliance levels and would be more susceptible to false recollections than those who are optimistic about their memory. In addition, we expected a discrepancy between subjective memory judgments and objective memory performance. We found that subjective memory judgments correlated significantly with compliance, with more negative memory judgments accompanying higher levels of compliance. Contrary to our expectation, subjective memory problems did not correlate with suggestibility or false recollections. Furthermore, participants were accurate in estimating their objective memory performance.

There are large individual differences in how people evaluate their own memory. Although most of us tend to be quite optimistic about the power of our memory, some people believe their memory is much poorer than that of others from their own age group (Crombag, Merckelbach, & Elffers, 2000; Magnussen et al., 2006). However, subjective ideas about memory do not always correspond to objective memory performance (Ponds & Jolles, 1996; Ponds, Van Boxtel, & Jolles, 2000). For example, healthy older people (more than 55 years old) who rate their memory as very poor often exhibit normal performance on standard memory tasks. In a forensic setting, pessimistic ideas about one’s own memory might have

far-reaching consequences. Given the weight that triers of fact attach to confidence (Leippe, Manion, & Romanczyk, 1992), people with such pessimistic ideas may erroneously be treated as less credible eyewitnesses or suspects. There are hints in the literature suggesting that negative ideas about one’s own memory are associated with elevated suggestibility levels and an enhanced susceptibility to false recollections. People who judge their own memory as very poor because they suffer from the “memory distrust syndrome” are thought to be especially prone to memory distortions (Gudjonsson & MacKeith, 1982). According to Gudjonsson (2003, p. 196), memory distrust is “a condition where

American Journal of Psychology

Summer 2009, Vol. 122, No. 2 pp. 249–257 • © 2009 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

AJP 122_2 text.indd 249

3/24/09 8:52:50 AM

people develop profound distrust of their memory recollections, as a result of which they are particularly susceptible to relying on external cues and suggestions.” This author described a number of court cases in which defendants suffering from memory distrust developed false memories, eventually resulting in false confessions (Gudjonsson, 2003; Gudjonsson, Kopelman, & MacKeith, 1999). Note that such isolated single cases do not provide hard evidence for an intimate connection between pessimistic opinions about one’s own memory and suggestibility. Furthermore, we believe that a distinction should be drawn between state and trait memory distrust, with the former referring to the cases described in the literature and the latter manifesting itself as a personality trait. In this article, we will focus on trait memory distrust, which can be seen as a negative subjective memory judgment. Compliance is a concept related to suggestibility. It can be defined as “a tendency of the individual to go along with propositions, requests or instructions, for some immediate instrumental gain” (Gudjonsson, 2003, p. 370). Whereas suggestibility assumes that people accept the information provided, this does not apply for compliance. Nonetheless, the consequences of complying can be far reaching in some settings. For example, think of complying with statements about a murder expressed by a police officer or complying with a therapist’s suggestion that you might have been sexually abused. Research has shown that people with poor self-esteem are highly compliant (Gudjonsson, Hannesdottir, Petursson, & Bjornsson, 2002). Because self-esteem and judgments about one’s memory seem to be related, a measure of compliance was included in our study. To our knowledge, the relationship between judgments of one’s own memory and suggestibility, compliance, false recollections, and objective memory performance has not yet been studied systematically. Therefore, we designed a study to examine these associations. Following the ideas of Gudjonsson (2003), we hypothesized that participants with subjective memory problems would exhibit higher levels of suggestibility and compliance and would be more susceptible to false recollections than those who reported to have excellent memory capabilities. The idea here is that people who have pessimistic ideas about their own memory will be more willing to com-

ply with the suggestive cues given by others. Furthermore, based on the work of Crombag et al. (2000), we expected that people would overestimate their own memory functioning. This hypothesis is consistent with research demonstrating that in healthy older adults, subjective evaluations of memory do not appear to be associated with objective memory performance (Ponds & Jolles, 1996; Ponds et al., 2000). We decided to select a sample of young and middleaged participants so as to be sure that the subjective memory judgments we measured were not linked to age-related memory problems. EXPERIMENT METHOD Participants

Our sample consisted of 142 young and middleaged research participants (37 men), who were recruited through advertisements in a regional newspaper. Their mean age was 34.23 years (SD = 8.06, range  =  17–46). The participants were told that they would be administered several memory tasks and questionnaires. They were given financial compensation (€25) for participating in our study. The research was approved by the standing ethical committee of the Faculty of Psychology, Maastricht University. Instruments Subjective memory.

A Dutch translation of the Squire Subjective Memory Questionnaire (SSMQ; Squire, Wetzel, & Slater, 1979; Van Bergen, Brands, Jelicic, & Merckelbach, 2009), with Cronbach’s α = .94, was used to measure subjective memory. This self-report questionnaire consists of 18 items that are answered on a 9-point scale (–4 = disastrous, +4 = perfect). Sample items are “My ability to recall things when I really try is” and “My ability to remember things that have happened more than a year ago is.” Scores are summed to obtain a total SSMQ score (varying from –72 to 72), with a negative score indicating a negative subjective evaluation of one’s own memory. The SSMQ has good test–retest stability, r = .89, n = 113 (Van Bergen et al., 2008). To test the concurrent validity of the SSMQ, we administered another index of subjective memory

250  •  van bergen et al .

AJP 122_2 text.indd 250

3/24/09 8:52:50 AM

functioning: the Dutch translation of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (Broadbent, Cooper, Fitzgerald, & Parkes, 1982; Merckelbach, Muris, Nijman, & De Jong, 1996), with Cronbach’s α = .92. The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire consists of 25 items that measure self-reported frequency of everyday lapses and errors in memory, perception and attention, and action. Illustrative items are “Do you forget where you put something like a newspaper or a book?”, “Do you fail to notice signposts on the road?”, and “Do you drop things?” Participants are asked to indicate on a 5-point scale how often they have experienced each cognitive failure in recent months (0 = never, 4 = very often). Scores are summed to obtain a total Cognitive Failures Questionnaire score, with higher scores indicating more self-reported cognitive failures. The Dutch translation of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire has adequate psychometric properties (Merckelbach et al., 1996). Suggestibility and compliance.

A Dutch translation of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (Gudjonsson, 1984) was used to measure suggestibility. The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale consists of a story that is read out loud by the experimenter. In the free recall phase, participants are asked to write down what they can remember from the story. Fifty minutes later, participants are given a second free recall test. Subsequently, they are asked a series of 20 questions. Fifteen of these questions contain misleading elements in the sense that they suggest things that are not mentioned in the story, whereas five other questions are factual memory questions. After they have answered the questions, participants receive negative feedback irrespective of their performance (i.e., “You have made a number of errors. It is therefore necessary to go through the questions once more, and this time, try to be more accurate”). Next, the questions are repeated. The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale yields several parameters. First, with regard to the free recall, the number of correctly reproduced story elements is counted (maximum = 40). This is done for both immediate and delayed recall. The corresponding interrater reliability parameters were .95 and .93, respectively (both ps